MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406214407 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.111.024021

<i>Mathematica</i> program for numerically computing real and complex critical points in four-dimensional Lorentzian spinfoam amplitudes

2025· article· en· W4406214407 on OpenAlexafffund
Muxin Han, Hongguang Liu, Dongxue Qu

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D. · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNoncommutative and Quantum Gravity Theories
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
FundersInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueWestern UniversityOntario Ministry of Economic Development and InnovationBeijing Normal UniversityFriedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-NürnbergGovernment of CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsIconSimplexAlgorithmPhysicsComputer scienceGeometryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work develops a comprehensive algorithm and a Mathematica program to construct boundary data and compute real and complex critical points in spin foam amplitudes. Our approach covers both spacelike tetrahedra and triangles in the Engle-Pereira-Rovelli-Livine model and timelike tetrahedra and triangles in the Conrady-Hnybida extension, aiming at addressing a wide range of physical scenarios such as cosmology and black holes. Starting with a single 4-simplex, we explain how to numerically construct boundary data and corresponding real critical points from any nondegenerate 4-simplex geometry. Extending this to the simplicial complex, we demonstrate the algorithm for constructing boundary data and critical points using examples with two 4-simplices sharing an internal tetrahedron. By revisiting the ${\mathrm{\ensuremath{\Delta}}}_{3}$ triangulation with curved geometry, we demonstrate the numerical computation of the real critical point corresponding to the flat geometry and the deformation to the complex critical points. Additionally, the program evaluates the spin foam action at the critical points and compare to the Regge action.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.100
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.473
Teacher spread0.445 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D.Same topicNoncommutative and Quantum Gravity TheoriesFrench-language works237,207